Another angle
Carey Jinright
Description
Collection
Title:
Another angle
Creator:
Carey Jinright
Date:
8/22/2014
Text:
Guys,
See the article below one more time, but I want us all to understand something. We are fighting the wrong fight! I have taken this to CMS and have been slapped down. Maybe someone with more power will read this and fight for us. We, as Orthotists should support this proposal!!! BUT, it's not the real fight. Let me explain:
** The real fight is at Orthotic Selection, not at fitting! You need clinical skills during the evaluation and assessment process. This is where our education is required! See if a manufacturer's rep or COF has an OTS brace at their disposal, EVERYONE gets that brace. Some of this is out of greed, some is out of ignorance. Some COFs really want to do good work, but they do not know enough about conditions or physiology to know when they are over their heads! Others simply say, I have this brace, it's a back brace, boom everyone gets this brace! Now, it really does not matter which reason led them to fit or use the wrong Orthosis. The problem is that now we cannot fix it as an Orthotist because we will receive a same or similar denial if we touch the patient. This occurs with knee braces, back braces, AFOs, etc. The COF or Manufacturer's rep has made their money and skip on down the road, while the LOCAL ORTHOTIST gets the call to fix it. It boils down to this. You must know anatomy, physiology, and how the Orthotic intervention will effect these systems in order to choose the appropriate brace!!
This may be over some people's heads, but an analogy: Can anyone argue that a surgical rep does not know the surgical procedure for which he/she is representing? Does the surgeon ever hand them the scalpel!? Would the insurance company pay the rep if the surgeon did?? Come on guys, this site is suppose to support and unite ORTHOTIST AND PROSTHETISTS! I know it now serves as a sounding board for everyone, but please WAKE UP. And our national boards that are on here, get to work on this stuff! If COF's can select braces and custom fit braces, who needs to be an Orthotist? Don't get me started on who needs a Master's Degree!!
Carey Jinright, LO, MSM
I Am Second
Confidentiality Notice - The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments to it may be legally privileged and include confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, distribution or copying of this e-mail or its attachments is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately of that fact by return e-mail and permanently delete the e-mail and any attachments to it. Thank you.
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Jim Hewlett, BOCO, BOC Board Chairman< <Email Address Redacted> >
> Date: August 22, 2014 at 9:07:06 AM CDT
> To: <Email Address Redacted>
> Subject: Please comment on the CMS proposed rule by September 2
> Reply-To: <Email Address Redacted>
>
>
>
> To All BOC Constituents:
>
> We are reaching out today about a matter of critical importance to O&P, you, your business, and ultimately the patients we serve.
>
> CMS has issued a proposed rule that will dramatically limit the care that can be provided by Certified Orthotic Fitters (COFs). The proposed rule, “CMS-1614-P: Medicare Program; End-Stage Renal Disease Prospective Payment System, Quality Incentive Program, and Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies,” can be read in its entirety at this link. In Section VIII on page 40297 (pdf page 91) you will see that in the current proposed rule COFs are essentially cut off from providing care to Medicare patients.
>
> Clearly, there is grave concern with this proposed rule, and BOC will be submitting comments to CMS about a number of them, both from BOC alone and along with the other major O&P organizations in a joint comment from the O&P Alliance*. Particularly alarming is that the rules state that Orthotics: custom-fitted prefabricated (OR02) may be dispensed and billed only by “individuals with specialized training,” which the rule defines as Orthotists, Physical Therapists, Occupational Therapists, Advanced-Practice Nurses, and Physicians. COFs are not included in this list. One way to address this omission is to point out to CMS that it has already given the authority to establish the requirements for provision of prefabricated orthoses (OR02) to its deemed accreditation organizations (including BOC).
>
> We urge you to submit a comment to CMS by September 2, and strongly oppose this aspect of proposed rule CMS-1614-P. You can send your own comment to:
>
> Marilyn Tavenner, Administrator
> Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
> U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
> Attention: CMS-1614-P
> P.O. Box 8010
> Baltimore, MD 21244-8010
>
> Or click here for a pre-written message that you can easily customize and submit. The text that appears in red should be deleted and replaced with your own words. Feel free to personalize or modify any other sections, as well. Then, submit your comment online at this link.
>
> Thank you in advance for taking action. If you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please email <Email Address Redacted>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> James L. Hewlett, BOCO
> BOC Board Chair Claudia Zacharias, MBA, CAE
> President & CEO
>
> P.S. We encourage you to forward this email to your colleagues and others who also should comment, as we need to make sure CMS hears our message loud and clear. Remember, the deadline to comment is September 2.
>
>
>
> *The Alliance’s input to CMS, which includes many additional comments that are not outlined here, may be found at this link.
>
>
> Board of Certification/Accreditation | 10451 Mill Run Circle, Suite 200 | Owings Mills, MD 21117
> 877.776.2200 | 410.581.6222 | BOC Website
>
> If you wish to no longer receive e-mail communication from BOC, unsubscribe from our mailing list.
>
>
>
>
See the article below one more time, but I want us all to understand something. We are fighting the wrong fight! I have taken this to CMS and have been slapped down. Maybe someone with more power will read this and fight for us. We, as Orthotists should support this proposal!!! BUT, it's not the real fight. Let me explain:
** The real fight is at Orthotic Selection, not at fitting! You need clinical skills during the evaluation and assessment process. This is where our education is required! See if a manufacturer's rep or COF has an OTS brace at their disposal, EVERYONE gets that brace. Some of this is out of greed, some is out of ignorance. Some COFs really want to do good work, but they do not know enough about conditions or physiology to know when they are over their heads! Others simply say, I have this brace, it's a back brace, boom everyone gets this brace! Now, it really does not matter which reason led them to fit or use the wrong Orthosis. The problem is that now we cannot fix it as an Orthotist because we will receive a same or similar denial if we touch the patient. This occurs with knee braces, back braces, AFOs, etc. The COF or Manufacturer's rep has made their money and skip on down the road, while the LOCAL ORTHOTIST gets the call to fix it. It boils down to this. You must know anatomy, physiology, and how the Orthotic intervention will effect these systems in order to choose the appropriate brace!!
This may be over some people's heads, but an analogy: Can anyone argue that a surgical rep does not know the surgical procedure for which he/she is representing? Does the surgeon ever hand them the scalpel!? Would the insurance company pay the rep if the surgeon did?? Come on guys, this site is suppose to support and unite ORTHOTIST AND PROSTHETISTS! I know it now serves as a sounding board for everyone, but please WAKE UP. And our national boards that are on here, get to work on this stuff! If COF's can select braces and custom fit braces, who needs to be an Orthotist? Don't get me started on who needs a Master's Degree!!
Carey Jinright, LO, MSM
I Am Second
Confidentiality Notice - The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments to it may be legally privileged and include confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, distribution or copying of this e-mail or its attachments is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately of that fact by return e-mail and permanently delete the e-mail and any attachments to it. Thank you.
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Jim Hewlett, BOCO, BOC Board Chairman< <Email Address Redacted> >
> Date: August 22, 2014 at 9:07:06 AM CDT
> To: <Email Address Redacted>
> Subject: Please comment on the CMS proposed rule by September 2
> Reply-To: <Email Address Redacted>
>
>
>
> To All BOC Constituents:
>
> We are reaching out today about a matter of critical importance to O&P, you, your business, and ultimately the patients we serve.
>
> CMS has issued a proposed rule that will dramatically limit the care that can be provided by Certified Orthotic Fitters (COFs). The proposed rule, “CMS-1614-P: Medicare Program; End-Stage Renal Disease Prospective Payment System, Quality Incentive Program, and Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies,” can be read in its entirety at this link. In Section VIII on page 40297 (pdf page 91) you will see that in the current proposed rule COFs are essentially cut off from providing care to Medicare patients.
>
> Clearly, there is grave concern with this proposed rule, and BOC will be submitting comments to CMS about a number of them, both from BOC alone and along with the other major O&P organizations in a joint comment from the O&P Alliance*. Particularly alarming is that the rules state that Orthotics: custom-fitted prefabricated (OR02) may be dispensed and billed only by “individuals with specialized training,” which the rule defines as Orthotists, Physical Therapists, Occupational Therapists, Advanced-Practice Nurses, and Physicians. COFs are not included in this list. One way to address this omission is to point out to CMS that it has already given the authority to establish the requirements for provision of prefabricated orthoses (OR02) to its deemed accreditation organizations (including BOC).
>
> We urge you to submit a comment to CMS by September 2, and strongly oppose this aspect of proposed rule CMS-1614-P. You can send your own comment to:
>
> Marilyn Tavenner, Administrator
> Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
> U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
> Attention: CMS-1614-P
> P.O. Box 8010
> Baltimore, MD 21244-8010
>
> Or click here for a pre-written message that you can easily customize and submit. The text that appears in red should be deleted and replaced with your own words. Feel free to personalize or modify any other sections, as well. Then, submit your comment online at this link.
>
> Thank you in advance for taking action. If you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please email <Email Address Redacted>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> James L. Hewlett, BOCO
> BOC Board Chair Claudia Zacharias, MBA, CAE
> President & CEO
>
> P.S. We encourage you to forward this email to your colleagues and others who also should comment, as we need to make sure CMS hears our message loud and clear. Remember, the deadline to comment is September 2.
>
>
>
> *The Alliance’s input to CMS, which includes many additional comments that are not outlined here, may be found at this link.
>
>
> Board of Certification/Accreditation | 10451 Mill Run Circle, Suite 200 | Owings Mills, MD 21117
> 877.776.2200 | 410.581.6222 | BOC Website
>
> If you wish to no longer receive e-mail communication from BOC, unsubscribe from our mailing list.
>
>
>
>
Citation
Carey Jinright, “Another angle,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 2, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/236628.
